Judge Weiser oversees misdeameanor cases in her court, not felonies. Therefore, how can these 30 people who were released all be connected to "violent" crimes? I'm sure the police reports do tell the WHOLE story.

victoriaconcernedcitizen,

You none too subtly, questioned the veracity of my posts. If defending myself and thowing some jabs back at you makes me a cyber bully, it appears you can hand it out but are apparently too sensitive handle it coming back your way. Oh well, have a good weekend and take care, I hear bully are lurking everywhere......

Ouch, Mader! Once again stung by your "wit". Sorry, your cyber-bully ways will not work on me. Take care and have a good weekend.

Mader,
Looks like you are the one with the spin now. First you write, "Their innocent victims were once again at the mercy of the perpetrators", and then clarify with "I said 30 people arrested for violent crimes (most of them for physical spousal or family abuse) were abruptly released and exposed thirty innocent victims to potentially more mayhem". Which is it?

By the way, the majority of people arrested usually get out when they make bail, even sometimes violent offenders. We still give the right for bail now, don't we?

Looks like your story is still spinning.

victoriaconcernedcitizen,

Go back and read my post - I didn't say anything about thirty RE-offenders. I said 30 people arrested for violent crimes (most of them for physical spousal or family abuse) were abruptly released and exposed thirty innocent victims to potentially more mayhem. I got this information off of the official, computerized police crime log through the Open Records Act.

The names of the offenders and victims were redacted because the cases hadn't gone to trial.

However, YOU can go down to the PD and see for yourself or YOU can call Gabe Semenza at the Victoria Advocate; he can confirm the information or show you his copy. I know he has it, because the Victoria-10 gave him a copy.

I AM talking facts which, if you get off your butt and don't expect to be spoon-fed, you can ascertain yourself.

As to the Advocate staff being liberal, I wouldn't know about that, although I strongly believe a previous editor, Mr Joe Pat Bean, certainly had a progressive, liberal agenda. I was truely glad to see that individual head for other pastures.

Mader,
Who are the 30 re-offenders? If you are stating this as fact, then please answer the question - you do have those names to back up your claim, don't you? Or would this be an unsubstantiated claim that is being allowed on the blogs by the liberal Advocate "editorial" staff?

Still waiting for Maximus to react to my reply..... Maybe his Caps Lock key is broken.

Maximus,

I'll give you a 6 on a scale of 10 for your ability to spin-doctor the Tyler/Hagen saga - you're a bit above average but other members of the Tyler team have done much better jobs. Have a chat with Randy Duke, he can probably help you out.

Yes Maximus,

I have a number of reasons for animosity toward Steve Tyler. I've written numerous posts detailing his abuse of power but I'm not going to reiterate them all because you're apparently behind the curve on the history of Tyler's action over the last two years. I will however cite one example. The D.A. decided that he was going to make ALL law enforcement officers sign a long, convoluted and potentially incriminating statement with each case presented to his office. Potentially incriminating because if they made the tiniest error or other pertinent information came out later, Tyler could charge then with a crime. NONE of the other 400 plus D.A.s in state of Texas required more than a simple statement to the effect that the information contained in the case was true to the best of the officer's knowledge. The agencies involved included the Victoria County SO, the Victoria PD and the TACB. All three agencies told their officers NOT to sign any such statement.

In retaliation, the D.A. refused to accept any cases for review for over 4 months that included over 300 cases by the VPD alone. The list of cases was available because of the Open Records Act. Local Judge Wisner informed Tyler that she had to release the people arrested in those cases because they weren't getting a speedy trial.

More than 30 of those people released had committed crimes of violence. Their innocent victims were once again at the mercy of the perpetrators, all because a bull-headed D.A. decided the public-be-damned; he was going to have HIS way. The situation was eventually resolved through arbitration (and no long winded statement was required to be signed).

So.... there're 30 particular reasons why I have animosity for your esteemed Mr. Tyler!

I see you've suggested that Tyler lowered his standards in accepting cases - that may or may not be true, only Tyler knows, but the statement he wanted signed had nothing to do changing his standards. You might ask yourself why he was the ONLY District Attorney in the State of Texas that wanted such a detailed statement.

By the way, contrary to your so called facts, David Smith never pled the fifth amendment before a district judge during this third rate carnival of Tyler’s.

As to David Hagen, he claimed that there has been a conspiracy to get Tyler for over two years but never spoke up about it till now when (Surprise! Surprise!) he has serious competition in the upcoming election. You see…. timing is everything!

A little forum etiquette for you old chap - typing a post in all caps is the equivalent of standing next to someone and SHOUTING in their face. I'm afraid you've let your EMOTIONS RULE your JUDGEMENT!

Yumi, I read & comprehend....I just found his "out" to be a little too convenient. I guess I should've stated it better, for the more literal crowd.

FIRST OF ALL, MR. MADER OBVIOUSLY HAS SOME ANIMOSITY OR PARTICULAR REASON TO BE SO NEGATIVE ABOUT MR. TYLER. HIS COMMENTS THEREFORE HAVE NO CREDIBILITY. PARTICULARLY DISTURBING IS HIS SARCASTIC TONE WHICH PROVES HE HAS SOME EMOTIONAL INVOLVEMENT IN THIS CASE. ANOTHER REASON NOT TO GIVE HIS COMMENTS ANY VALUE. WE ALL ARE SEARCHING FOR THE TRUTH.

ASK YOURSELF, AFTER TYLER REFUSED TO LOWER HIS STANDARDS ON ACCEPTANCE OF CASES FROM THE POLICE AND SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, EVEN AFTER THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL GOT INVOLVED, WHAT MOTIVE WOULD HE HAVE TO GO AFTER THE MAYOR, CITY ATTORNEY, AND OFFICER BUENTELLO? WHAT REASON WOULD HE HAVE? WHY DID THEY GET INVOLVED IN A CASE THEY HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH AT ALL?

THEN ASK YOURSELF, WHY WOULD THE CHIEF, THE MAYOR AND OFFICER BUENTELLO NOT WANT TO TESTIFY ABOUT WHAT THEY DID REGARDING THEIR INVOLVEMENT. WHY WOULD THE CITY ATTORNEY, DAVID SMITH, GO BEFORE A DISTRICT JUDGE AND PLEA THE 5TH AMENDMENT?

THEN YOU MUST ASK YOURSELF, WHY HAVE THEY COME AFTER COUNCILMAN DAVID HAGAN SO AGGRESSIVELY FOR WANTING TO TELL WHAT HE BELIEVES IS THE TRUTH ABOUT ACTIVITIES OF THE MAYOR AND OTHER COUNCILMEN? WHAT MOTIVE WOULD HAGAN HAVE TO DO SO?

COMMON SENSE TELLS YOU THEY HATED MR. TYLER FOR HIS REFUSAL TO PLAY BALL WITH THEM, OR IN THE MAYOR'S CASE, SHOW THEM THE RESPECT THEY THINK THEY DESERVE. ANY PERSON WITH RELATIVE COMMON SENSE WOULD COME TO THE CONCLUSION THOSE WITH MOTIVES ARE EASILY IDENTIFIED.

THEY WANTED TO GET BACK AT MR. TYLER SO BAD THEY DID WHAT MOST PEOPLE DO WHEN THEY LET THEIR EMOTIONS RULE THEIR JUDGEMENT. THEY STEPPED OVER THE LINE.

AS FOR JUDGE CHESHIRE, HE WASTED A GREAT DEAL OF TAXPAYER MONEY AND CITIZENS TIME WITH HIS INVOLVEMENT. HE NEEDS TO TELL US, THE PEOPLE OF VICTORIA WHO PAY HIS SALARY, WHY HE DECIDED TO BACK OUT OF THIS CASE AT THIS TIME. HE AT LEAST OWES US A TRUTHFUL EXPLANATION.

SAY AND THINK WHAT YOU WISH ABOUT MR. TYLER. BUT YOU HAVE TO ADMIT, STANDING ON PRINCIPLES YOU BELIEVE IN EVEN WHEN IT'S POLITICALLY INCORRECT, KNOWING YOUR JUMPING ON THE BACK OF A LION IS ADMIRABLE. IF I WERE IN A FOX-HOLE BEING SHOT AT FROM ALL DIRECTIONS, I'D CHOSE MR. TYLER OR MR. HAGAN TO WATCH MY BACK BEFORE ANY OF THE OTHER FOLKS INVOLVED.

When is Jerry Springer showing up in Victoria?

To each his own in reference to our interpretations of why the Honorable Cheshire would recuse himself at this point, I would venture to say that he realized he didn't want to get caught up in the "Good Old Boy" buddy system that is still very much alive and well in city admin, especially in smaller towns. My opinion is that it's possible that the more he realized that this case actually did have purpose caused him to realize that he may have to rule against what the majority favors, all in the name of justice, as it should be. Although I find myself restless at this point to get to the truth, I think it's a wonderful idea to bring in an outsider with NO ties to anyone involved, political or personal.

Cheshire should have vacated the bench the moment he granted probation to the drunk driver that killed that little girl.

He [cheshire] probably didn't want to be on the bench and too be subponea. This whole town is a MESS!!! Lets see what Kemper does now....all the parties involved went to the same get togethers, functions, galas what-have you. They all know something and I say VOTE them ALL OUT.

What is funny about all this is that Ratcliff is holding the 'ace card'. Some procedure or video that will excuse him and punished the real felons out there.

To Judge Cheshire. Durn I miss the edit after you post feature.

Sounds more to me like "someone" most likely a witness or soon to be witness, imparted what he or shes testimony would contain outside of the presence of the the DA or counsel for the defense.

Well, all I can say is....Mader, do you really think Tyler got a District Judge to recuse himself? Now THAT is some power! Get real, Mader. Not every "conspiracy theory" you and your "girlfiend" Yume work on has someone on the grassy knoll!

I understand why he's doing it, but why didn't he do this from the get go?

Like I said on an earlier post: CLEAN HOUSE ! NO FAULT ! NO PROBLEM! That's the "easy" way out! I don't really want anyone to lose their jobs,---BUT !

Now my opinion: and I'm a "little" hypocritical here:

NEW JUDGE-------NEW JURY----------NEW D A !

A very smart move from a very smart man.

From my experience with Judge Cheshire, he is a fair, impartial judge. He takes his responsibilities very seriously. He also follows the law to the letter. So for him to make this move, he must feel that it will be in the best interest of the people of Victoria.

But for the LOVE OF PETE can we puh - lease get this show on the road and get it over with?????

Way to leave the "circus" Chesire!!

WoW!! Good Move!